UKskins Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 11 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said: Normally I'm fine finding a RB later in the draft. But this scouting staff has not proven to be able to do that. Without a 3rd, for now anyway, that means either the first or second or taking another 4th round flyer that has not worked out well in the past. I'm absolutely fine with that. There's no RB worth picking at 13 assuming Barkley is gone. So the option is trade back, or pick up Payne/Vea and address RB in the 2nd where there's a lot more to choose from in the right kind of value range. Hankins is the wildcard here - if we could get him inked then we can make a luxury pick at 13 like Minkah (if he's still on the board), and still pick up one of the better RBs. No Hankins means our hand is forced to pick Vea or Payne - not that it would be a terrible thing, but the options are more limited - it won't really effect the RB choice though. Late round flyer is not an option - we need to spend some resources and this is a good draft to do it. It definitely won't be the first unless Barkley is there, but it is almost certain to be the 2nd round pick I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandweave Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 12 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said: Normally I'm fine finding a RB later in the draft. But this scouting staff has not proven to be able to do that. Without a 3rd, for now anyway, that means either the first or second or taking another 4th round flyer that has not worked out well in the past. I agree, so sign a capable part time vet like Demarco Murray for 3.5 million for one season and address the position. The bust rate on all RB's taken 2nd round or later is over 50%, if they take someone that busts which is more likely than not and doesn't work out then they screwed themselves and it's not like this team needs a 20+ carry a game bell cow with Chris Thompson here anyway. They need a guy with some skills that will tote the ball 10-12 times per game. No reason to go nuts drafting a 22 year old by the time that guy is playing with the next QB he will be a free agent. That's what I think they should do. Not a fan of Demarco, bring in an even younger and cheaper Orleans Darkwa. Lots of cheap options out there. No reason to just go draft draft draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 3 hours ago, Burgold said: I really liked the way our dbs progressed under Gray. It's amazing what they've done with Dunbar and I know the team feels he can be a legit #2, if he has a solid season as a starter that's a great story and something the coaching staff should be proud of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandweave Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 3 minutes ago, UKskins said: I'm absolutely fine with that. There's no RB worth picking at 13 assuming Barkley is gone. So the option is trade back, or pick up Payne/Vea and address RB in the 2nd where there's a lot more to choose from in the right kind of value range. Hankins is the wildcard here - if we could get him inked then we can make a luxury pick at 13 like Minkah (if he's still on the board), and still pick up one of the better RBs. No Hankins means our hand is forced to pick Vea or Payne - not that it would be a terrible thing, but the options are more limited - it won't really effect the RB choice though. Late round flyer is not an option - we need to spend some resources and this is a good draft to do it. It definitely won't be the first unless Barkley is there, but it is almost certain to be the 2nd round pick I would imagine. Personally think they are a year late on that. Last year was the year of RB's, this year its top heavy and then question marks to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malapropismic Depository Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 minute ago, JSSkinz said: It's amazing what they've done with Dunbar and I know the team feels he can be a legit #2, if he has a solid season as a starter that's a great story and something the coaching staff should be proud of. I havn't seen anyone talk about Torrian Gray (maybe they did and I missed it), but Gray my be the reason : 1) Fuller developed so well 2) Dunbar converted so well from WR 3) They feel so comfortable with Dunbar as their main option at #2 4) They feel so comfortable that either Moreau or Holsey can develop into the next slot guy to replace Fuller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 By the way on available cap space we have $21M and some change free based on the top 51 contracts. But the rookie pool is circa $6.5 Million so that gets you down to $14.5M. Then you need an in season pool for injuries - say another $5M maybe a touch less. We probably only have another $9 or $10M of cap space to play with right now, We also might want to be able to roll some of that over into next year when we will have to exercise the option on Scherff or extended him - which is going to cost a LOT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKskins Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 minute ago, bobandweave said: Personally think they are a year late on that. Last year was the year of RB's, this year its top heavy and then question marks to me Possibly mate - time will tell - can't turn the clock back though, and we need a decent RB in the building. Murray ain't the answer - he's done. Put up Matt Jones type numbers for 2 of the last 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 32 minutes ago, goskins10 said: when you take out the $6M for the draft I think that number is closer to $3.2M in effective cap space needed to sign our rookies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoggingGod Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 12 minutes ago, MartinC said: By the way on available cap space we have $21M and some change free based on the top 51 contracts. But the rookie pool is circa $6.5 Million so that gets you down to $14.5M. Then you need an in season pool for injuries - say another $5M maybe a touch less. We probably only have another $9 or $10M of cap space to play with right now, We also might want to be able to roll some of that over into next year when we will have to exercise the option on Scherff or extended him - which is going to cost a LOT. McClain is probably gone saving $2-3 mil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WelshSkinsFan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 18 minutes ago, bobandweave said: I agree, so sign a capable part time vet like Demarco Murray for 3.5 million for one season and address the position. The bust rate on all RB's taken 2nd round or later is over 50%, if they take someone that busts which is more likely than not and doesn't work out then they screwed themselves and it's not like this team needs a 20+ carry a game bell cow with Chris Thompson here anyway. They need a guy with some skills that will tote the ball 10-12 times per game. No reason to go nuts drafting a 22 year old by the time that guy is playing with the next QB he will be a free agent. That's what I think they should do. Not a fan of Demarco, bring in an even younger and cheaper Orleans Darkwa. Lots of cheap options out there. No reason to just go draft draft draft. Based on recent play and the tread on his tires Murray would be grossly overpaid at 3.5 million and I doubt he could beat Perine out in training camp. I get the desire to have the position fixed now but no point in throwing money at guys who are no better than the current roster and there is nobody out there in this FA class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 16 minutes ago, MartinC said: But the rookie pool is circa $6.5 Million so that gets you down to $14.5M. I don't think that's how it works. https://overthecap.com/draft/ The effective cap spaced needed is equal to: Rookie Pool – ($480,000 x number of picks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 4 minutes ago, JSSkinz said: I don't think that's how it works. https://overthecap.com/draft/ The effective cap spaced needed is equal to: Rookie Pool – ($480,000 x number of picks). Check out what the rookie pool for the Redskins is on that link you posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Purely for humor reasons PJ Cumberland and 2 others liked Clark McMillian @bisonskins 3h3 hours ago More The new @redskins Front Office and coaching staff is going to love the Cap situation come this time next year. 1 reply1 retweet3 likes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#BgMase76# Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 10 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said: I think I've underestimated how well liked this player is. Watching the boards I think most ppl have under estimated Roullier. I thought he played well. Both as a rookie and on a make shift OL. I know we need depth but I had him penciled in as the C going into this season. Maybe wishful thinking but an off-season training next to Sheriff he should be ready to rip. Granted, still don't know who the LG is gonna be. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan66 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Ricky-Jean Francos signed with Lions per the Red Zone. No mention of Sylvester Willliams signing yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coolio47 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 5 minutes ago, skinsfan66 said: Ricky-Jean Francos signed with Lions per the Red Zone. No mention of Sylvester Willliams signing yet. Just saw this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 21 minutes ago, bobandweave said: LOL Which is your way to do it. Thing is the highest bust rate in the draft is at RB for first round picks and that only goes from 58% to less the lower the rounds. To me if your going all in on a win it now season then you sign a RB like Murray for cheap and open up that first and second round pick for someone else. Agree to disagree - but I see your point. 21 minutes ago, bobandweave said: Sorry but with no 3rd round pick they don't need 6 million for draft picks lol. Tandler has the number between 2-3 million. But whatever you want to say, use your numbers. Your the only person I've seen try and say they only have 6-8 million left. The 2st rd pick is about $3 to $4M alone. Here is Sportrac who calculates the CAP - They espimate $6.5M in draft pool needs. It also does not have the Scandrick contract yet. So I may be a little low but it's still only about $10M based strictly on the rule of 51. Once you get tothe seaosn it will include IR players and practice squad players and the other 2 on the active roster. The PS and other 2 active players alone will equal close to $2M. 21 minutes ago, bobandweave said: Sorry Sir they brought in some guys and gave them a meal. The guys were hungry. I'm sure those clients liked the press they got from the visits but not one of them helped the team. You said specifically they did not bring anyone in. That is incorrect. They did not sign anyone but they did bring them in. And Hankins at least was there almost all day. You can try to dismiss it all you want but they brought guys in - which was the only point. 21 minutes ago, bobandweave said: I guess but no reason to believe it will change, how many teams still got millions more than the Redskins that have to spend it? Too many to type out. Not sure what this has to do with anything. I said I am waiting for details. If Hankins left for less than $10M/yr then they screwed up. If he wanted $12M or more than not upset at all. In the middle - have to see the parameters of the deal and determine. 21 minutes ago, bobandweave said: Sorry if I came across harsh. I said I won't argue with apologists of this front office and that includes you. I won't argue. Sorry to everyone for posting what I thought about the job Bruce Allen has been doing to help this team. To me in my opinion it's crap. But if people like it that's cool. I won't share anymore Sir you can continue to support them but the longer it goes with them not addressing the similist needs this team has the less likely I am going to be thinking they are doing anything right. You again miss the point. No one is being an apologist. While what they have done has not worked out - they have tried. Do I like their approach? NO! And I even stated that. How is that being and "apologist". And who is supporting the FO? What I am not going to do is just because I do not like Bruce - which I do not at all, I think the guy is a total jerk - is say everything he does is total ****. Fact - they have tried to address the DLine. It has not worked and I do not like their approach. Fact - The CAP left is not actually $20M Fact - The Daft Pool is upwards of $6M Fact - They have brought people in for Dline and done more than buy them dinner - again, Hankins was here all day. Fact - Jonathan Allen as doing a down good job and has a chance to be something special if he can get healthy. I can hate Bruce Allen and overall do not think he has done a good job for this team. But I can also acknowledge that he and the FO have tried to fix the Dline - just has not worked - nor is it how I would have approached it outside of drafting Allen. They have also done some other positive things. You are literally making up your own narrative just to try and talk down to other people with even the slightest different view here - hance why I called out your accusations at the other poster. For you, the FO is complete and total **** - well except when they got rid of Kirk Cousins. You have been defending the FO trading for Alex Smith. Doesn't that make you an apologist for those that do not like the deal? LOL There are a very few people that are true apologists for the FO who support most of their moves. But just because someone sees some moves bad some not so bad and yes some even positive that does not mean yet support everything they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsTillIDie Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 hour ago, bobandweave said: http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/jonathan-allen?id=2557844 Allen was an DE. And no I'm not forgetting anything. And I'm not going to argue with someone who thinks that it's okay to rank 32nd in rushing yards allowed per game in 2017 - https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-rushing-yards-per-game 24th in 2016 - https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-rushing-yards-per-game?date=2017-02-06 26th in 2015 - https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-rushing-yards-per-game?date=2016-02-08 And wants to excuse them not fixing this. Your opinion is fine. I don't agree with it at all. This has to be fixed. Bottom line, no excuses. It has to be fixed and I hope with all my fiber and being that if Bruce Allen once again doesn't address this that he gets fired as soon as another team wrecks the season because the last impression of the rushing Defense was Orleans Darkwa rushing for over 150 ending the season. https://www.change.org/p/redskins-need-to-fire-bruce-allen Wow - dude, I'm the same guy who argued for both signing Hankins and drafting Vea / Payne. I'm the guy who posted that a team's organizational M.O. should be a pursuit of a top-5 defensive and offensive line with a top-10 QB, and should invest the most cap space and highest draft picks in those areas. (And therefore very strongly disbelieve in the "best player available" drafting philosophy). I'm far from happy with the defensive line's performance, and our run game defense as a whole. My point was that the front office didn't ignore the issue last year but tried (and mostly failed), adding three interior defensive linemen. We used our 1st round pick [who IS an interior lineman -- Jonathan Allen (6'3, 286 at combine) was drafted to serve a similar role as Fletcher Cox (6'4, 298 at combine)] and signed two mid-tier free agents at the behest of our coaching staff. You blame Bruce Allen entirely, that's fine. My point is that the coaching staff preferred two linemen vs one higher priced one and that Tomsula didn't want a traditional nose. McCloughan ranked McGee high on his free agent board, as he did with Swearinger. One worked out well, the other didn't. Again, you want to place all the blame on Allen, fine. We both agree that the run defense was putrid and needs to the offseason's #1 priority. I'm well aware we allowed more rushing yards (2146) than any team in the league last year. And allowed 4.5 yards per rush (29th) and 105 first downs (27th). Meanwhile, the Eagles allowed only 3.8 yards per rush. 1267 yards. Teams only attempted to run on them 337 times and only secured 62 first downs. For the Eagles, their success started with stopping the run first. I'm well aware that forcing teams to 2nd and 3rd and longs will allow us to load up on a pass rush, that 3rd and 5s are demonstrably different than 3rd and 2s, and that our 3rd down defense will be exponentially improved when we can trot out 4 pass rushers to focus exclusively on collapsing the pocket instead of having to play both the run and the pass. We haven't had a defense that has inspired confidence that we'll get a stop on 3rd and short. We haven't had a defense that has inspired confidence that, when down a score late in the 4th and needing a stop against a team trying to run out the clock, we'll get that stop. But I also don't think we're as far off as you think, for a number of reasons I'll get to in another post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 2 minutes ago, Coolio47 said: Just saw this. Yea, just saw that too and wondered why nobody caught it 3 hrs ago. That takes Hankins off the Lions radar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said: I think that number is closer to $3.2M in effective cap space needed to sign our rookies. I like overthecap for in season. But they do not do a good job during free agency and their draft pool calculations are very rough. The actual pool needed has to do with where you draft, how any picks you have, and what round you need. Last year Hassan Reddick (#13 pick) signed for 4yrs $13.5M - fully guaranteed - with a 5yr option. Now he negotiated a slightly lower CAP hit for 2017 but most are even across; And it will be a little higher this year. So for one pick alone it will be at leastg $2.5M. Gerald Everett (#12 in the 2nd rd) signed a 4 yr $6M contract with a $1.1M CAP hit in 2017. That's with back loading it. So with just 2 players you have about $3.6M and that will be a little higher this yr. Granted the salaries go down after that. But even at league minimum for all 4 - which I believe is $465K - that's almost $2M. So the rookie pool is indeed about $6M, not $3.2M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 11 minutes ago, HigSkin said: Yea, just saw that too and wondered why nobody caught it 3 hrs ago. That takes Hankins off the Lions radar. it was posted somewhere here hours back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 6 minutes ago, goskins10 said: I like overthecap for in season. But they do not do a good job during free agency and their draft pool calculations are very rough. The actual pool needed has to do with where you draft, how any picks you have, and what round you need. Last year Hassan Reddick (#13 pick) signed for 4yrs $13.5M - fully guaranteed - with a 5yr option. Now he negotiated a slightly lower CAP hit for 2017 but most are even across; And it will be a little higher this year. So for one pick alone it will be at leastg $2.5M. Gerald Everett (#12 in the 2nd rd) signed a 4 yr $6M contract with a $1.1M CAP hit in 2017. That's with back loading it. So with just 2 players you have about $3.6M and that will be a little higher this yr. Granted the salaries go down after that. But even at league minimum for all 4 - which I believe is $465K - that's almost $2M. So the rookie pool is indeed about $6M, not $3.2M. Ok, so I've been trying to figure this out and everything I found was vague. I guess I don't understand the point of the rookie pool equation if the final number means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan66 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 14 minutes ago, HigSkin said: Yea, just saw that too and wondered why nobody caught it 3 hrs ago. That takes Hankins off the Lions radar. That was news in the tread 3 or 4 hours ago, my point is he still has not signed and another DL has Ricky-Jean Francois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoggingGod Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Just now, skinsfan66 said: That was news in the tread 3 or 4 hours ago, my point is he still has not signed and another DL has Ricky-Jean Francois. Both are signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Just now, JSSkinz said: Ok, so I've been trying to figure this out and everything I found was vague. I guess I don't understand the point of the rookie pool equation if the final number means nothing. LOL - Agreed. Overthecap puts that in there as a quick and dirty rough estimate. They really should not because it's just not that accurate. It depends so much on where you draft and how many picks you have. They are great resource in some ways - I love the salary calculator. But then other things - not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.